Organicist vs. Analytic

Answer choices

1. A

   Wrong Emphasis: Author's View Missing2% picked this

   By calling into question the possibility that complex systems can be studied in their entirety, organicists offered an alternative to the analytic

   The main clause here is a neutral idea that, "Organicists offered an alternative to the analytic method". We're not capturing the author's Challenge Position purpose if the main clause doesn't sound more like "Organicists offered a crappy alternative to the analytic method".

   2%
2. B

   Wrong Main Objection3% picked this

   Organicists did not offer a useful method of studying complex systems because they did not acknowledge that there are relationships into which an entity

   The first half of this answer is fine, but if we're going to only cite one of the author's objections to organicism it should be something that sounds more like the 4th paragraph. It's a bigger complaint that "your theory renders the acquisition of knowledge impossible" than it is to say, "Hey, not all relationships change an entity's identity!"

   3%
3. C

   Too Narrow17% picked this

   Organicism is flawed because it relies on a theory that both ignores the fact that not all characteristics of entities are defining and ultimately

   This answer could easily be a correct answer, if there weren't a broader one that wraps its arms around more of the passage. This captures the author's attitude in writing about organicism and both objections seem pretty valid (they refer to the 3rd and 4th paragraphs, respectively). But this answer, unlike the correct answer, doesn't touch on any of the author's comments from the 5th paragraph, in which she explains how organicism had an incorrect sense of what the analytic method was all about.

   17%
4. D

   Correct68% picked this

   Organicism does not offer a valid challenge to the analytic method both because it relies on faulty theory and because it is based on

   Why this is right

   This answer beats (C) by being more expansive in its language, and thus able to capture the author's discussion in the 3rd, 4th, and 5th paragraphs. The 3rd and 4th cover how the theory of internal relations is faulty (not every relationship changes an entity in any defining way / this theory would render the acquisition of knowledge impossible). And the 5th paragraph covers how organicists misrepresented the analytic method: their criticism arose from their failure to comprehend the analytic method. The final sentence of the passage also sounds like the author's big conclusion: Hence, organicists offered no valid reason for rejecting analytic or for adopting organicism as a replacement. This lines up well with the language in this answer that "Organicism does not offer a valid challenge to the analytic method".

   Skill tested: Main Point · how this choice captures the passage's function is the move to repeat next time.

   68%
5. E

   Out of Scope: neglected to disprove9% picked this

   In criticizing the analytic method, organicists neglected to disprove that scientists who employ the method are able to discover the laws and initial

   Overall, this answer feels too narrow in targeting language from the middle of the final paragraph. There, we were saying that "in criticizing the analytic method, organicists failed to recognize that analytic scientists were first determining the laws and initial conditions of the system". Nothing was ever talking about them "neglecting to disprove X". There's a big difference between, "You failed to recognize that X is true" and "you failed to disprove X (failed to prove that X is false)."

   9%